Current Events > Biden picks basic scientist as science advisor also making it a cabinet position

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/biden-picks-geneticist-as-science-adviser-elevates-position-to-cabinet

President-elect Joe Biden announced Friday that he has chosen a pioneer in mapping the human genome the so-called "book of life" to be his chief science adviser and is elevating the top science job to a Cabinet position.

Biden nominated Eric Lander, founding director of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, who was the lead author of the first paper announcing the details of the human genome, as director of Office of Science and Technology Policy and adviser on science. He is the first life scientist to have that job. His predecessor is a meteorologist.

---

wait i don't understand

how is he related to biden

or which megacorp or religious group did he used to lobby for

---

Basic? I don't get the joke, this guy's a big fucking deal, and someone actually qualified for the position.

---

EnvoyOfTheLight posted...

Basic? I don't get the joke, this guy's a big fucking deal, and someone actually qualified for the position.

Basic science as in not applied science. A basic scientist asks fundamental questions about the way the world works. An applied scientist often work towards some end goal, like developing treatment strategies for disease, building technology, producing predictive models, etc.

---

A geneticist, as opposed to literally any other branch of science like physics or chemistry.



---

Genes are just a theory and Biden is a shameless technocrat who unfairly favors those with merits and qualifications.

---

Xenozoa425 posted...

A geneticist, as opposed to literally any other branch of science like physics or chemistry.

What's your beef with genetics?

---

Pitlord_Special posted...

Biden is a shameless technocrat who unfairly favors those with merits and qualifications.

I want to print this out and frame it

---

To the right picking a scientist is a bad thing, to them you are supposed to hire your kids or son-in-law for jobs they aren't qualified for.

My only issue with this pick is that he tends to push the big science consortium stuff that was very successful in the case of early genetics work, but probably isn't really a good template for all science problems.

---

Pitlord_Special posted...

Genes are just a theory and Biden is a shameless technocrat who unfairly favors those with merits and qualifications.

LOL wow

---

This is equivalent to hiring Pee Wee Herman to be a science advisor.

<_<

---

COVxy posted...

What's your beef with genetics?

None at all, it just strikes me very odd that he'd appoint someone that studies genes instead of something more practical and useful to have in these times in a cabinet position, like health sciences, chemistry or psychology.

But then again, it's government, so

---

Lol basic science bitch

---

Xenozoa425 posted...

None at all, it just strikes me very odd that he'd appoint someone that studies genes instead of something more practical and useful to have in these times in a cabinet position, like health sciences, chemistry or psychology.

But then again, it's government, so

So we should have that clean your room guy running it? Isnt he a psychologist.

Xenozoa425 posted...

that studies genes instead of something more practical and useful ... like ... psychology.

You gotta be fucking kidding me.

---

Xenozoa425 posted...

None at all, it just strikes me very odd that he'd appoint someone that studies genes instead of something more practical and useful to have in these times in a cabinet position, like health sciences, chemistry or psychology.

But then again, it's government, so

LOL you gotta be trolling. The alternative is... hmmmmmmmmm.

---

Lol, next thing you know he'll pick a female to be Secretary of Defense, what a loser.

PoundGarden posted...

Lol basic science bitch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c-Cf6O0ogI

Ronald McDonald for Biden Administration

---

COVxy posted...

Basic science as in not applied science. A basic scientist asks fundamental questions about the way the world works. An applied scientist often work towards some end goal, like developing treatment strategies for disease, building technology, producing predictive models, etc.

<_> internet slang has ruined me, thanks

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

I want to print this out and frame it

yeah its like crybaby shit

---

DirkDiggles posted...

This is equivalent to hiring Pee Wee Herman to be a science advisor.

<_<

How so?

COVxy posted...

What's your beef with genetics?

Genetics and politics, no matter which side, could have malicious results.
---

Hop103 posted...

Genetics and politics, no matter which side, could have malicious results.

Geneticist =/= eugenicist.

---

Seriously? A geneticist?

---

Seems good imo

---

holy shit are conservatives actually gonna make this a thing they get upset over lol

wait til biden wears a tan suit or has mustard on a burger or something

---

COVxy posted...

Basic science as in not applied science. A basic scientist asks fundamental questions about the way the world works. An applied scientist often work towards some end goal, like developing treatment strategies for disease, building technology, producing predictive models, etc.

So leave the working scientists unencumbered to do their jobs and hire a basic scientist to ask questions to and get the ball rolling. Seems like a smart move.

---

What is happening in this topic?
---

DeadBankerDream posted...

What is happening in this topic?

I have no idea tbh lol Im too tired to make sense of it though

---

DeadBankerDream posted...

What is happening in this topic?

People are mad that Trump lost so this is happening.



---

Oh no! A president hired a qualified person to his cabinet! That fucking animal.

---

Doom_Art posted...

holy shit are conservatives actually gonna make this a thing they get upset over lol

wait til biden wears a tan suit or has mustard on a burger or something

theyre gonna complain about literally everything

at least it wont be a meteorologist who helps
deny climate change this time

---

DeadBankerDream posted...

What is happening in this topic?

@DeadBankerDream

From what I can tell COVxy, a legitimate PhD scientist, expressed some slight concerns with the president-elect's cabinet choice. Then a bunch of people entered the topic without an understanding of what he was talking about and immediately assumed he was an angry Trumper despite being openly against Donald his entire Presidency.

---

Doom_Art posted...

holy shit are conservatives actually gonna make this a thing they get upset over lol

wait til biden wears a tan suit or has mustard on a burger or something

And on the 21st they will suddenly start caring about the number of COVID19 deaths happening per-day. Just watch.

COVxy posted...

My only issue with this pick is that he tends to push the big science consortium stuff that was very successful in the case of early genetics work, but probably isn't really a good template for all science problems.

I'm not familiar. Can you explain big science consortium stuff a little bit please?

---

Jiek_Fafn posted...

I'm not familiar. Can you explain big science consortium stuff a little bit please?

Yeah I can't wait to hear this.

---

Ruvan22 posted...

How so?

It's not, hence the shifty eyes.

---

Jiek_Fafn posted...

I'm not familiar. Can you explain big science consortium stuff a little bit please?

So, these tend to be large funding efforts that fund extremely large groups of scientists to do one large thing. But this really depends on the question at hand. If your project has a definitive solution and the only roadblock is man hours, then this type of thing makes sense. But the issue is that if the problem is more complex than that what this does is soak up grant funding and reduce the diversity of information in the field.

In human brain science, the human connectome project kind of represents a shift in the field towards a homogeny that is not helpful to the field, for instance.

---

ZEROWOLF posted...

So leave the working scientists unencumbered to do their jobs and hire a basic scientist to ask questions to and get the ball rolling. Seems like a smart move.

That's not what the distinction means. When I say "ask questions" i mean "do science and try to answer questions".

---

Trump doessnt even believe is science so...

---

Is this in the same realm as theoretical vs applied sciences?

Are you worried that this person will try to brute force results?
Mote worried they they'll try to fit the result to their methods, rather than adjusting their methods towards a result?

---

meestermj posted...

Is this in the same realm as theoretical vs applied sciences?

Theoretical fields don't collect data, that is something different.

Also, just to be clear, I am excited that a basic scientist has entered this role. I'm a basic scientist and have seen the winds of funding shifting over the past decade shifting towards applied work. Having someone that values fundamental work in a high up position is nice, maybe he'll whisper into the correct ears.

meestermj posted...

Are you worried that this person will try to brute force results?
Mote worried they they'll try to fit the result to their methods, rather than adjusting their methods towards a result?

No. My minor concern is that he may have influence in pushing government programs in funding large consortium projects over funding efforts that fund individual labs. But i'm not even certain that someone in this role really has that type of influence.

---

COVxy posted...

Theoretical fields don't collect data, that is something different.

Also, just to be clear, I am excited that a basic scientist has entered this role. I'm a basic scientist and have seen the winds of funding shifting over the past decade shifting towards applied work. Having someone that values fundamental work in a high up position is nice, maybe he'll whisper into the correct ears.

No. My minor concern is that he may have influence in pushing government programs in funding large consortium projects over funding efforts that fund individual labs. But i'm not even certain that someone in this role really has that type of influence.

I see! Thank you very much for the clarification.
My experience in the realm of the sciences is mostly limited to the programming/coding field, and even then mostly as a hobbyist (have a 2 year diploma but nothing else).
So the concern is more about this individuals ties to consortium and influence over possible funding/policy/contract availability.

---

Basic af

---

COVxy posted...

So, these tend to be large funding efforts that fund extremely large groups of scientists to do one large thing. But this really depends on the question at hand. If your project has a definitive solution and the only roadblock is man hours, then this type of thing makes sense. But the issue is that if the problem is more complex than that what this does is soak up grant funding and reduce the diversity of information in the field.

In human brain science, the human connectome project kind of represents a shift in the field towards a homogeny that is not helpful to the field, for instance.

Gotcha. Thank you!
I get the concept now but im not going to pretend I understand the distribution of scientific funding enough to weigh in on it. I understand your concern though.

---